danieLion wrote:The Buddha and the dhamma are the "source," not a language.

Unfortunateley, the Buddha is unavailable to answer questions because he died over 2,500 years ago

What we have, and interestingly, what are still being discovered, are documents which are the result of oral transmissions in various languages including pali, sanskrit, gundari, chinese, etc.

If interested, I would highly recommend Bikhu Analayo's comparative analysis lectures. I think the value of learning the languages that the dhamma has been written will be apparent when listening to this course.

When this concentration is thus developed, thus well developed by you, then wherever you go, you will go in comfort. Wherever you stand, you will stand in comfort. Wherever you sit, you will sit in comfort. Wherever you lie down, you will lie down in comfort.

danieLion wrote:Too many great Buddhist teachers have not mastered Pali--and many others have not even come close--for me to think it should be placed above using translations to guide our practice.

I have mixed feelings about this. For me, I'd rather spend time on practice and reading than to spend a lot of time mastering Pali idioms.

However, for teachers it may be a different story. I presume that if you're talking about Theravadin teachers above you're referring mostly to non-monastic and presumably Western teachers. I've come across very few Bhikkus who don't have a reasonable knowledge of Pali.

While the recent fashion for historical and comparative studies is interesting, it doesn't change the fact that we have a complete Canon, Commentary, Sub-Commentary, and living tradition in Theravada. And most of that is quite inaccessible without Pali. I don't need to personally read all that, but I appreciate having the work of dedicated teacher-scholars (especially Bhikkhu Bodhi) who do, and have shared their knowledge in English.

Its certainly better to read the texts in translation than not to read them at all.

But if you enjoy reading the suttas, why not try learning Pali?

In English speaking countries most people do not learn additional languages, so it may seem to be more difficult for them.

However, Pali is an Indo-European language, and the Pali Text Society has published everything in the Latin script, so there is no need to learn Pali script.

When this concentration is thus developed, thus well developed by you, then wherever you go, you will go in comfort. Wherever you stand, you will stand in comfort. Wherever you sit, you will sit in comfort. Wherever you lie down, you will lie down in comfort.

"For a disciple who has conviction in the Teacher's message & lives to penetrate it, what accords with the Dhamma is this:'The Blessed One is the Teacher, I am a disciple. He is the one who knows, not I." - MN. 70 Kitagiri Sutta

Kamran wrote:But if you enjoy reading the suttas, why not try learning Pali?

I usually enjoy reading the suttas and I usually enjoy learing Pali. It's not a matter of enjoyment. It's a matter of priorities. When I can't keep up with my Mexican maintenance man's Spanish, we don't stop and have a Spanish lesson. He just starts speaking English.

Hmm, without some Pali, would one know how to interpret the 5th Precept? I see some really wonky interpretations out there that try to take advantage of a supposed loophole that exists only in English translations ("intoxicants that cause heedlessness"). See how BB now translates the Precept in the AN.

Sylvester wrote:Hmm, without some Pali, would one know how to interpret the 5th Precept? I see some really wonky interpretations out there that try to take advantage of a supposed loophole that exists only in English translations ("intoxicants that cause heedlessness"). See how BB now translates the Precept in the AN.

Sylvester wrote:Hmm, without some Pali, would one know how to interpret the 5th Precept? I see some really wonky interpretations out there that try to take advantage of a supposed loophole that exists only in English translations ("intoxicants that cause heedlessness"). See how BB now translates the Precept in the AN.

How does he? I don't have a copy of AN translation.

The Pali is surāmerayamajja pamādaṭṭhānā.

BB now translates it as "liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness".

The Pali syntax shows a nexus between the nouns and the quality, not a junction. In English, a Pali nexus is translated as above, or as "intoxicants, which are the basis for heedlessness". "That" is used more properly for Pali junctions, when the sutta is proposing a limited set of nouns possessing that quality. If the syntax indicates a nexus, the sutta is proposing the non-limitation of the set, ie all of the nouns in the universe possess the quality and in fact define the quality.

Sylvester wrote:Hmm, without some Pali, would one know how to interpret the 5th Precept? I see some really wonky interpretations out there that try to take advantage of a supposed loophole that exists only in English translations ("intoxicants that cause heedlessness"). See how BB now translates the Precept in the AN.

How does he? I don't have a copy of AN translation.

The Pali is surāmerayamajja pamādaṭṭhānā.

BB now translates it as "liquor, wine, and intoxicants, the basis for heedlessness".

The Pali syntax shows a nexus between the nouns and the quality, not a junction. In English, a Pali nexus is translated as above, or as "intoxicants, which are the basis for heedlessness". "That" is used more properly for Pali junctions, when the sutta is proposing a limited set of nouns possessing that quality. If the syntax indicates a nexus, the sutta is proposing the non-limitation of the set, ie all of the nouns in the universe possess the quality and in fact define the quality.

I don't know what you are referring to here. A nexus? In Pali the whole phrase is one composite word: surāmerayamajjapamādaṭṭhānā. And all of the elements are nouns. So I'm sorry, but I see no basis for your analysis.